1 Tuesday, 14 February 2012
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 2.21
5 JUDGE ORIE: Good afternoon to everyone.
6 Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours.
8 This is the case IT-03-69-T, the Prosecutor versus
9 Jovica Stanisic and Franko Simatovic.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
11 The Chamber was informed, Mr. Jordash, that you'd like to raise a
13 MR. JORDASH: Yes, I would like to, please.
14 It's concerning Mr. Stanisic's health, and it's a request to the
15 Trial Chamber to intervene to this extent. We would request an urgent
16 report from Dr. de Man on top of the report we've requested in relation
17 to the Bronovo hospital and the specialist treatment Mr. Stanisic is
18 hoping to receive at that hospital.
19 I won't detain the Court for long, but this is our concern.
20 First of all, as Your Honours know, Mr. Stanisic has been waiting for
21 treatment at the Bronovo hospital for some time. As Your Honours also
22 know, he did receive some new treatment and then that treatment was
23 stopped because of concerns that it was not going to assist Mr. Stanisic
24 and, in fact, might have some unpleasant side effects.
25 Your Honours will recall we requested a report last week dealing
1 with the developments on that issue, and, in particular, what the latest
2 advice is and what the latest expectation is in relation to his
3 treatment. Mr. Stanisic was told that he would receive the new
4 treatment - this is, I think, the third type of biological treatment -
5 and he was told that he would receive that last week. That still hasn't
6 happened. So we are concerned about that, and we would renew our request
7 for a report dealing with this subject as soon as possible.
8 Our principal concern, though, at this moment is the treatment
9 that Mr. Stanisic receives within the UNDU for his psychiatric illness.
10 Trying to obtain information from the Registry is difficult, to say the
11 least. But we have requested, and I won't go over the history of the
12 requests, but, in short, on the fourth request, the Registry disclosed to
13 us that Mr. Stanisic did, in fact, have notes relating to his treatment
14 or his medical examinations for his psychiatric condition. Why it took
15 four times to receive that information is still a mystery.
16 As is, what precisely the treatment he receives is still a
17 mystery. We requested, upon receipt of the information that there are,
18 in fact, notes in existence, the notes. And that was two weeks ago, and
19 we're still waiting for those notes. Apparently those notes are in a
20 compilation of notes with other detainees' notes and it appears that it
21 takes two weeks to redact that information before considering disclosing
22 that to Mr. Stanisic's representatives.
23 Again, why it would take that long to disclose medical notes to
24 an accused is, again, still a mystery. But, putting aside the mystery,
25 we are deeply concerned. What we've had disclosed to us is a summary
1 purporting to be a summary of Dr. Petrovic's examinations of the accused
2 over the last few years. It's a two-page summary, so we don't expect
3 that this contains the kind of detail we hope the notes contains. But
4 what it does contain is the following sentence:
5 "The examinee constantly receives an appropriate medicament
6 therapy aimed at lowering down the psychological disturbances but the
7 psycho therapy is insufficient but it is -- because it is possible every
8 seventh week when the psychotherapist is present."
9 Now that contradicts what we've been told by the Registry, which
10 said that Mr. Stanisic received therapy every four to six weeks. But
11 putting that aside, what is clear, even from the scant information that
12 the Registry provides, is that Mr. Stanisic's treatment for a serious
13 psychiatric condition, an ongoing enduring psychiatric condition, is
14 inadequate within the UNDU.
15 Now, has that led to a situation where we are in a position where
16 we're saying Mr. Stanisic is not fit? No. Has that led to a situation
17 where his health may well be less than it should be if he had received
18 appropriate treatment? Then that looks very likely. And that, of
19 course, has an impact not on just Mr. Stanisic's health, which is the
20 principle concern of Mr. Stanisic, but our principal concern is that that
21 leads him to a position where he is not as healthy as he could be to
22 defend this trial. And so it does engage Your Honours, we would submit,
23 at this stage before we get to the crisis point where we are actually
24 saying: He is not fit to continue.
25 So to summarise and not to detain the Court any longer, we have
1 two possible ways to proceed. One, is to go to -- through the
2 bureaucratic obstacles which appear to be placed in front of us by the
3 Registry. We get the notes from Dr. Petrovic in the next few days. We
4 then engage with the Registry about the treatment. We eventually get a
5 report from Dr. Petrovic dealing with some further questions about
6 Mr. Stanisic's treatment and eventually perhaps the Registry will provide
7 proper treatment within the UNDU. I can see that lasting several months,
8 several months at a critical time in Mr. Stanisic's trial.
9 Instead, what I would hope is that Your Honours would expedite
10 this protracted process and ask Dr. de Man to deal with this issue,
11 comment as swiftly as possible on whether -- what his view is of
12 Mr. Stanisic's treatment for his psychiatric condition within the UNDU.
13 And upon receipt of that report, we can move from there perhaps more
14 swiftly and obtain, as quickly as possible, proper treatment for
15 Mr. Stanisic within the UNDU so that he can focus on his trial rather
16 than worrying about his treatment.
17 And we've tried to, as much as we can - I speak on behalf of the
18 Stanisic Defence and also the accused - keep Mr. Stanisic's health out of
19 the picture as much as we can. And that's involved a huge amount of work
20 behind the scenes, making sure that Mr. Stanisic maintains a proper grip
21 on what is going on. But there comes a point when the Registry put so
22 many obstacles in front of us, the treatment looks inadequate,
23 Mr. Stanisic constantly struggles with his health, and, despite to
24 wanting to keep moving forward, clearly, to us, appears like he's
25 struggling to the point of danger. And there comes a point, in our
1 submission, when we have to start thinking about applying to suspend the
2 trial. Because we are representing a client who is extremely ill, on the
3 one hand, the notes appear to indicate that his treatment is inadequate
4 in the UNDU, and every time we go to the Registry all we receive are
5 obstacles. The latest obstacle being, Oh, it has got nothing to do with
6 us. It is to do with the commander of the UNDU.
7 So this is the situation we're in. I'm sorry to take the time up
8 with the Court, but I wanted the Court to understand our deep frustration
9 and concern about Mr. Stanisic and hope that the Court will react to
11 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Jordash. I think it is not a secret
12 that the Chamber always wants to pay appropriate attention to these kind
13 of problems. It is also not a secret that there's a thin line between
14 concerns about treatment and the impact of treatment on the trial.
15 We'll consider what you just said, and you're primarily asking
16 for an additional report by Dr. de Man dealing with adequacy of the
17 treatment and -- and his assessment of the present situation of
18 Mr. Stanisic, that's what you're asking for.
19 MR. JORDASH: Your Honour, yes.
20 JUDGE ORIE: We'll consider it. And any other matter?
21 MR. JORDASH: No, thank you.
22 JUDGE ORIE: No other matter.
23 Then could the witness be brought into the courtroom, which gives
24 me time, at least, to deal with one issue.
25 Yesterday the first eight pages of 1D05008 were exhibited but not
1 yet, at that time, uploaded. I do understand that now the first eight
2 pages of the B/C/S and the corresponding English pages are uploaded as
3 1D05008.2. A number had already been reserved for it; that was D695.
4 And I think that there were no objections, Ms. Friedman, which means that
5 1D05008.2 is admitted into evidence as D695.
6 [The witness takes the stand]
7 JUDGE ORIE: Good afternoon --
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good afternoon.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Good afternoon, Mr. Gagic. I'd like to remind that
10 you that you're still bound by the solemn declaration you've given at the
11 beginning of your testimony, and Ms. Friedman will now continue her
13 Ms. Friedman, please proceed.
14 MS. FRIEDMAN: Thank you, Your Honour.
15 WITNESS: GVOZDEN GAGIC [Resumed]
16 [Witness answered through interpreter]
17 Cross-examination by Ms. Friedman: [Continued]
18 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Gagic.
19 You've testified that you were employed continuously in the
20 Serbian MUP and that the only pension you receive is from the
21 Serbian MUP; correct?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And it's based on your uninterrupted service from 1980 to 2006?
24 A. Yes.
25 MS. FRIEDMAN: Could we now have 65 ter 6377.
1 Oh, and can we go into private session, please.
2 JUDGE ORIE: We move into private session.
3 [Private session]
11 Pages 17273-17275 redacted. Private session.
8 [Open session]
9 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
11 MS. FRIEDMAN:
12 Q. Did -- from what you said, did they share information freely
13 about the units that they commanded?
14 A. Well, they didn't have independent units under their command.
15 Badza was the overall commander for the TO Staff; whereas Arkan was the
16 commander of one of the units under that staff. In other words, Badza
17 was Arkan's superior.
18 Q. Does that mean that Arkan reported on his activities to Badza?
19 A. Yes. On the activities for which he was charged by the Staff, he
20 would submit reports on a regular basis.
21 Q. Do you know specifically which activities he was charged by the
22 Staff? I -- I take it you mean the TO Staff?
23 A. Yes, I mean the TO Staff.
24 Well, he was primarily charged with the reception and training of
25 volunteers and their deployment to the neuralgic points where was the
1 greatest risk from the Croatian forces in the area of Slavonia. He was
2 also charged with providing supplies for his units. He took part in the
3 operations carried out around Vukovar.
4 Q. You also observed Goran Hadzic at the centre. Did Hadzic also
5 receive information from -- let's start with Arkan?
6 A. I had never seen Goran Hadzic in any formal capacity, say, in a
7 meeting, or at a gathering. I saw him come in and go out of the centre
8 on a number of occasions.
9 Q. Did you have an opportunity to observe his relationship with
10 Arkan when he was at the centre?
11 A. No. Nor did I take any particular interest in it.
12 Q. Did you observe his interaction with Badza?
13 A. I would follow that because their meetings would take place in
14 the same location where my unit was billeted, i.e., the Saponia offices
15 in Erdut. They had meetings regularly every morning, and I would attend
16 some of them, though most of them I did not.
17 Q. On the ones that you attended, would Badza brief Hadzic on the
18 activities of the Territorial Defence?
19 A. We misunderstand each other. I meant the Badza and Arkan
20 meetings. I did not attend any meetings where Hadzic would be present.
21 Q. So you did not -- is it your evidence, then, that did you not
22 observe Hadzic and Badza interacting?
23 A. That is my evidence, that I did not.
24 Q. Yesterday you were asked whether the SAO Krajina was looking to
25 the Ministry of Defence to assist them with a training -- with training
1 combatants by establishing a training centre in Prigrevica. And you
2 answered, at T.17190:
3 "By that time, the idea had ripened and requests were sent, and
4 the top police and military leadership decided - I don't know exactly
5 when - that the training centre should be set up in Erdut rather than
6 Prigrevica, which lacked the necessary infrastructure for such training
8 This is the training centre in Erdut that was run by Arkan;
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. When you say that the police and military leadership decided to
12 set it up, are you referring to the Serbian Ministry of Defence and
13 Serbian MUP?
14 A. Yes. I meant the Serbian Ministry of Defence and the Serbian
15 MUP. Because Prigrevica sits in the territory of the Republic of Serbia,
16 whereas Erdut is in the SAO Slavonia and Baranja, or, rather, Croatia.
17 Therefore, the RSK Ministry of Defence was not able to decide to set up a
18 training centre in the territory of Serbia. Such a decision could have
19 been taken only by the Serbian Ministry of Defence, and it was for that
20 reason that the decision was made to open up a centre in Erdut.
21 Q. So that centre in Erdut was opened up by the Serbian MUP and
22 Ministry of Defence?
23 A. The centre in Erdut was opened by the Ministry of Defence and the
24 Ministry of police of the Republic of the Serbian Krajina, because it was
25 not possible to set up a centre outside of Slavonia in order to train
1 individuals residing in Slavonia.
2 Q. And you were asked whether General Ivanovic provided Arkan with
3 military registration plates as a means of getting through border
4 crossings, and you stated:
5 "I don't know how true it is because the relationship between
6 Arkan and the people from the MUP was much closer."
7 That's at T.17198.
8 Is that a reference to the Serbian Krajina MUP and the Serbian
10 A. Well, the Serbian MUP, too, because through Badza, who was an
11 employee of the Serbian MUP and the commander of the special
12 anti-terrorist unit, I in fact meant the Serbian MUP. Because I had
13 never seen any other vehicle in possession of the Arkan's unit with
14 military registration plates and that's why I said that I found it
16 Q. You testified last week that you "had known Arkan from before on
17 several different bases."
18 On what bases did you know him?
19 A. Arkan is several years my senior. As a youth, I had an
20 opportunity to learn of Arkan, not to meet him in person, because he was
21 a bouncer working in a number of discotheques. So many wanted to become
22 acquainted with him. So this is still the period before I started
23 working for the MUP. It was from that period that I was aware of his
24 nickname, Arkan. From the later period, I knew that he was involved in
25 criminal activities abroad and that he been convicted for these crimes.
1 And to tell you frankly, I was surprised to see him leading a select
2 number of Serbian patriots later.
3 Q. Did you -- you say you were surprised. Did you ask anyone in a
4 position of authority why Arkan was the one training volunteers?
5 A. There was no one to ask, really.
6 It was a fait accompli even before I could show any sort of
7 interest in that and exhibit any sort of influence. He had, by then,
8 become such a prominent personality in Slavonia that it became
9 superfluous to raise an issue like that.
10 Q. You testified about his relationship with the Novi Sad Corps
12 "Arkan's relations with the Novi Sad Corps Command and
13 lower-ranking officers of that corps was professional. It was quite
14 decent. He conducted himself as a subordinate. He did not in any way
15 stick out from the system for the conduct of combat that was in force in
16 the armed forces."
17 Did you know that in his conduct within battles he was also
18 committing crimes?
19 A. Well, save for excessive use of force in combat, if that can be
20 treated as crime, I am not aware of specific cases where Arkan or members
21 of his guard committed crimes in person. It is possible, however, that
22 in an exchange of fire excessive force was used.
23 Q. Did you believe that the excessive force was the intention of the
24 Novi Sad Corps Command?
25 A. Well, I'm not sure that that was the intention, but it was
1 definitely there.
2 For instance, in one of the actions aimed at neutralising two
3 snipers, a silo was destroyed through excessive use of force. After all,
4 they were only targeting two individuals, and probably there was no other
5 way of neutralising them, since they - although there were only two of
6 them - did have under firm control an area of some 2 kilometres.
7 MS. FRIEDMAN: I'd now like to call up Exhibit P1219.
8 Q. This is a transcript from an interview given by
9 General Biorcevic, and he described co-ordinated actions involving
10 Arkan's Men.
11 And I'd like to, in particular, take you to the -- the last thing
12 that he says, which is:
13 "We surround a village, they enter it, kill those who refuse to
14 surrender and we go on."
15 I take it you were not aware that this role was endorsed by
16 General Biorcevic?
17 A. Well, I don't see anything that is an issue here.
18 It is stated here: "... those who refuse to surrender." Well, I
19 suppose they would be combatants firing upon Biorcevic and his men, and
20 if they refused to surrender, of course, that they would neutralise them,
21 kill them.
22 Q. Okay. If that's how you take it.
23 I would like to move on, then, to --
24 MS. FRIEDMAN: I'm finished with this exhibit.
25 Q. -- during your time in Dalj, if you were aware that Arkan and his
1 men were committing crimes against civilians, ethnic Croats and
3 A. No.
4 Q. Sir, Dalj is a small village; correct?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. And, on the night of October 4th, you were in Dalj?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. You also -- you testified, in fact, that you and your men were
9 patrolling -- you and the other men in your unit were patrolling Dalj
10 while you were there.
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. So are you saying that you are not aware that 26 prisoners were
13 killed by Arkan and his men on that night of October 4th?
14 A. I'm not aware of it.
15 Q. We've heard evidence that there was a public rally afterwards
16 because the bodies were washing up on the Danube and that the villagers
17 gathered, and Arkan took responsibility for these crimes. It was a quite
18 a big rally, and the local police were there to guard it.
19 Are you saying that you were not aware of that either?
20 A. My unit was not present there, nor were we engaged to enforce law
21 and order at that rally. Had it been a larger rally, on a more massive
22 scale, perhaps I would have been aware of it. But I suppose it was just
23 the local villagers who gathered there, and I never came to learn of that
25 MS. FRIEDMAN: Could we have P11, please.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Could I ask you one question.
2 I'm trying to analyse your last answer.
3 You said it was a -- "had it been a larger rally, on a more
4 massive scale, perhaps I would have been aware of it."
5 Now, at the same time, you say, I'm not aware of it, and you're
6 saying, Would it have been larger, then perhaps I would have been aware
7 of it. Which suggests that you have knowledge that it was a small-sized
9 Was it?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. Had the rally been larger, our
11 unit, too, would probably have been engaged to maintain law and order
12 there. Since it had not been engaged, I assumed that it must have been a
13 smaller gathering.
14 Besides, based on what the Prosecutor said, based on her
15 interpretation, this happened several days after our arrival in Dalj, at
16 which point we were still dealing with certain arrangements, billeting,
17 making the premises we were allocated to habitable, and so on.
18 JUDGE ORIE: You said several days. What made you believe --
19 when Ms. Friedman said there was a public rally afterwards, what makes
20 you believe that it was several days?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, Ms. Friedman said that the
22 event took place on the 4th of October.
23 JUDGE ORIE: And she said we've heard evidence that there was a
24 public rally afterwards.
25 You say it was several days after your arrival, at which point
1 you were still dealing with certain arrangements.
2 So I tried to understand your evidence in detail. On the one
3 hand, you say, Well, must have been a small one because we were not
4 called to keep -- to keep order; at the same time, you say, We were not
5 actually yet operational because we are dealing with other matters.
6 Now, that -- these are two different explanations. Could it have
7 been that it was a larger rally but that you were still busy with your
8 accommodation, et cetera, or is that impossible?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I cannot claim either that it was
10 small or large. My conclusion was that it was a small rally, a sort of
11 spontaneous gathering of citizens which could not have lasted more than
12 it -- well, it didn't last for five or six hours. It was probably ended
13 quite soon thereafter. And when I was describing the time-frame, that
14 was based on the date that I was given, the 4th of October. And I
15 assumed that the citizens gathered soon after the incident, and it all
16 happened in that period of time shortly following our arrival and
17 deployment there.
18 MS. FRIEDMAN: We'll now turn to P11. This is a police report
19 that documents --
20 MR. JORDASH: Sorry to -- I'm just wondering if it might be fair
21 to the witness to put the details of the rally to him and see if that
22 assists. It's just a suggestion.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Of course, I'm not opposing to that, Ms. Friedman.
24 At the same time, the witness says, We were not involved in any way in a
25 rally which took place briefly after the 4th of October. What is then --
1 should we say, Do you even not remember that was it a sunny day or that
2 there were a thousand people, or that there were 50 people, or would that
3 change anything.
4 MR. JORDASH: Well, to be honest, I can't remember the size of --
5 what the evidence is in relation to this subject. I can't remember the
6 size of the rally. So I think that -- my first thought was that we would
7 all be assisted with a reminder as to the size of the rally, and the
8 witness then may have interesting observations to make about the size of
9 the rally and it may --
10 JUDGE ORIE: He is not aware of the rally. How could he possibly
11 say anything about the size of the rally?
12 MR. JORDASH: Well, if it's a rally with 20 people, he might say,
13 I was dealing with a situation where there was -- with 50 refugees
14 somewhere, so a rally of 20 people would not have come to my attention.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Well, I would not object if you would seek further
16 evidence to clarify what this witness could tell us or could not tell us
17 about the rally, but I also think that there's no obligation to do so.
18 Please proceed.
19 MS. FRIEDMAN: Thank you, Your Honours. I believe he has had
20 sufficient information, including that it was a response to the bodies
21 washing up from the river, and that most of the village gathered, and
22 that the police were securing it. I think that is sufficient, but I can
23 review over the break.
24 Q. Now, could you please look at this police report, Mr. Gagic, a --
25 I would like you to read it, and please let me know when you've finished.
1 MS. FRIEDMAN: Could I also ask that it be lifted so that we see
2 the signatories on the bottom. And we can already go to the second page
3 in English.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I've read it.
5 MS. FRIEDMAN:
6 Q. At the bottom, the document is signed by the Dalj police station
7 commander, Zeljko Cizmic. Did you meet Mr. Cizmic when you were in Dalj?
8 A. No.
9 Q. And on the left-hand corner we see who it was sent to. The first
10 addressee is police administration secretary of the Autonomous District
11 of Slavonia, Baranja, and Western Srem. Do you know who that was at the
13 A. Well, we are using different titles here. I think that the
14 secretary, who would in today's terms be a minister, was still Bogunovic.
15 Though not Veljko Bogunovic who was the commander of the unit but a
16 different Bogunovic who was in charge of the MUP.
17 The heading of the document indicates that -- we can perhaps look
18 at the top of the document, and there you will see the Republic of
19 Croatia, Ministry of the Interior, Police Administration, Osijek,
20 Baranja. Based on what we can read there, there had still not been a
21 more serious transformation in that particular SUP, which was a bit
23 Q. Yes. And the last addressee that we see on this is Special Unit
24 Commander Zavisic. And that is Zavisic that reported directly to Badza;
1 A. Yes. Zavisic was one of Badza's assistants.
2 Q. And you testified that when you arrived, it was for the
3 purpose -- "the crime prevention police had not been established."
4 But -- isn't this exactly what the police Commander Cizmic was
5 trying to do, to get accountability and prevent future crimes?
6 A. Well, it clearly follows from this that he did advocate that
8 MS. FRIEDMAN: I'd like to now move into private session.
9 JUDGE ORIE: We move into private session.
10 [Private session]
11 Page 17288-17292 redacted. Private session.
17 [Open session]
18 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
20 MS. FRIEDMAN:
21 Q. You received information in relation to the crimes in Zvornik
22 from the ICTY Office of the Prosecutor; is that correct?
23 A. The War Crimes Prosecutor received it from the
24 International Tribunal, and I got it from the War Crimes Prosecutor
25 through the Republic of Serbia.
1 Q. And you participated in meetings with OTP investigators and
2 attorneys about the cases, handing over the files; is that right?
3 A. No.
4 Q. And the Zvornik case included both Yellow Wasps paramilitaries
5 and others, such as Branko Popovic; correct?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Branko Popovic, also known as Marko Pavlovic, he was the head of
8 the Territorial -- he was the commander of the Territorial Defence unit
9 in Zvornik; is that right?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And when asked about this man you stated:
12 "I am not aware of any links he would have with either the MUP or
13 the DB of the Republic of Serbia, nor was such a link established during
15 Did you interview any of the witnesses who testified against
16 Branko Popovic?
17 A. No.
18 Q. Were you aware of the evidence that they gave before the
19 investigative judge?
20 A. I read the book by Natasa Kandic -- I'm sorry, the book related
21 to the Skorpions. As far as the Yellow Wasps are concerned, I was not
22 actively involved in the case.
23 Q. So, in that case, on what basis did you say that your
24 investigation didn't lead to any connections between Mr. Popovic and the
25 Serbian MUP?
1 A. Based on talking to him.
2 Q. To Mr. Branko Popovic?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Just to make sure, I believe I've asked you, but you are not
5 familiar with the file in relation to the case? Your only familiarity is
6 from talking to him?
7 A. As far as his connections with the MUP, all I know is from
8 talking to him. I know the rest of the story from the documentation you
9 made available to the prosecutor.
10 Q. And that documentation that we made available, it did link
11 Mr. Popovic to the Serbian MUP; isn't that correct?
12 A. I had no occasion to see that part of the documentation. I only
13 saw photographs of persons linked to this crime, their personal details
14 that were rather imprecise and, in fact, inaccurate.
15 Q. "Persons linked to the crime." Do you mean -- is that victims or
17 A. Perpetrators.
18 Q. How did you know that their details were imprecise if you weren't
19 involved in investigating?
20 A. From the moment when I received the prosecutor's request,
21 including their photographs and their personal details, I proceeded to
22 identify these persons, to locate their places of residence, and prepare
23 the action to arrest them. And, in this process, I found a lot of
24 mistakes, errors in the documentation provided by the prosecutor
25 concerning their personal information.
1 Q. So such as date of birth, address, contact detail, that sort of
3 A. I mean their years of birth were inaccurate. In two cases,
4 photographs were swapped, including names and surnames. And in one case,
5 the address was wrong.
6 Q. Okay. With respect to the Skorpions, you testified that you
7 received documentation based on which you were to arrest the alleged
8 perpetrators and that you studied that documentation and established that
9 they had no connection with the Serbian MUP or DB.
10 Did you find this documentation -- did you find in this
11 documentation that the Skorpions were reporting to Vaso Mijovic?
12 A. I learned that from that book I mentioned by Natasa Kandic which
13 includes the transcript of the trial of the Skorpions. But before
14 reading the book, I didn't know about the connection between Vaso Mijovic
15 and this group.
16 Q. And did you know that Vaso Mijovic worked for the Serbian DB?
17 A. I know that Vaso Mijovic worked for the DB of Serbia and the DB
18 of Montenegro.
19 Q. So then there was a connection between the Serbian DB and the
20 Skorpion trial --
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash.
22 MR. JORDASH: May I address you in the absence of the witness,
23 please. I do think that there is to be greater precision in the way that
24 these issues are put because I think there's been some misrepresentation.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Let's first establish --
1 Witness, do you understand the English language?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, no.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Not a word? Apart from yes or no, perhaps, but ...
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Nothing. Apart from yes, nothing.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Could you take off your earphones for a second,
7 Mr. Jordash.
8 MR. JORDASH: My learned friend asked the witness whether he had
9 found in this documentation that the Skorpions were reporting to
10 Vaso Mijovic. But I think that the more accurate statement is that one
11 witness out of the trial stated that the Serbian MUP were reporting to --
12 sorry, the Skorpions were reporting to Vaso Mijovic. And that's
13 significant because none of the suspects said that they had any
14 connection to Vaso Mijovic. Kovac said that the Skorpions reported to
15 Vaso Mijovic. But Kovac was also the gentleman who claimed not to have
16 heard of Commander Medic, and we all know Commander Medic's connection to
17 the Skorpions.
18 So to put it to the witness as if this documentation is riddled
19 with suggestions that Vaso Mijovic was connected to the Skorpions is
20 quite misrepresentative of the situation. It is Natasa Kandic who is
21 absolutely convinced the Skorpions were connected to Vaso Mijovic and one
22 particular individual --
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash, I'm going to interrupt you already
25 The problem of the Chamber is we do not know what documentation
1 has been made available at the time, so if you say it misrepresents what
2 was sent, we couldn't give you an answer because we do not know what was
3 sent and what was the content of it.
4 Ms. Friedman, please also keep this in mind if you respond to
5 Mr. Jordash, the best way of dealing with the matter would be to be very
6 precise in stating what that documentation contains as information so as
7 to avoid that Mr. Jordash jumps up and puts a question before the Chamber
8 the Chamber cannot rule upon. Well, of course, we could try to find the
9 procedural means by saying, Please tell us exactly what you did give, or
10 try to agree on that, or we could hear further evidence on that. But, of
11 course, that is not the most efficient way of proceeding.
12 So, therefore, if Mr. Jordash says this, and this, and this is to
13 be found in this documentation, let's just assume that Mr. Jordash knows
14 exactly what has been provided.
15 Do you know that, Mr. Jordash?
16 MR. JORDASH: Well, I know what has been provided to us from the
17 Prosecution in relation to the Skorpions trial and I'm presuming
18 Ms. Friedman is working from that documentation.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. That is an assumption. So we do not know
21 I interrupted you. I'd like, if you would not mind, first give
22 Ms. Friedman already an opportunity to see whether she knows how to
23 resolve this problem for the Chamber.
24 MR. JORDASH: From our perspective, I think that the Chamber is
25 either going to, in our submission, have to see this documentation or the
1 Prosecution are going to have to agree certain things, such as no witness
2 other than Kovac linked Vaso Mijovic to the Skorpions.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Let's hear whether Ms. Friedman has a good solution
4 for us.
5 MS. FRIEDMAN: Yes, Your Honours. First, I would like to note
6 that I was not finished this line of questioning, that I followed up on
7 what the witness said about Natasa Kandic.
8 Second, the documentation that I am referring can be easily
9 ascertained. It is -- which I was getting to. It is not witness
10 evidence. I was not going to go into the witness evidence. But the
11 Skorpions judgement itself - which Mr. Jordash is familiar with and which
12 is uploaded as 1D -- or let me see, 1D1321 - does refer to the
13 documentation that was provided by the ICTY. So what I was going ask
14 this witness is if he received the same documentation and I was going to
15 ask him about those particular documents, not witness evidence.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash, there seems to be an indirect reliance
17 on the materials sent by the ICTY, such that Ms. Friedman relies on what
18 was said in the judgement about what was received from the ICTY.
19 MR. JORDASH: Sorry, I'm not sure I'm following this.
20 If it -- the Skorpion judgement certainly did not find that
21 Vaso Mijovic was in charge of the Skorpions, that's what -- but perhaps
22 I'm missing the point. But that's what -- the judgement did not find
23 Kovac to be honest on that issue.
24 MS. FRIEDMAN: I am not seeking recourse to the judgment or the
25 witness evidence. The question is -- the way to ascertain the documents
1 that were provided to Mr. Gagic and to his ministry is by looking to the
2 actual written record of what was provided and that's contained in the
3 Skorpions judgement. And from the description of the documents in the
4 Skorpions judgement, we can identify that two of them were also admitted
5 in this trial. So I was just going to direct his attention to the
6 evidence that is before this Trial Chamber and that was handed over to
7 his office and to the investigative judge of the Skorpions trial.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Now, let's get back to what triggered the whole
9 discussion, which was about Mijovic, but I have to go back to --
10 One second, please.
11 Yes, I think the appropriate question to be put to the witness
12 would be: What he -- he said that Mijovic worked for the DB. We could
13 ask him what he learned from the documentation, in terms of reports given
14 to Mijovic. And if he says, I did not learn anything from this
15 documentation, we can ask whether he learned that from the book from
16 Kandic and whether he verified -- or whether he ever found it in the
17 documentation sent. And then, of course, we could also ask him whether
18 he had gone through the whole of the documentation or whether he had seen
19 only part of it. And then we can deal with it without the suggestions
20 where apparently Mr. Jordash has some problems with. Let's try to
21 resolve the matter at this moment in this way.
22 I leave it in your hands at this moment, Ms. Friedman.
23 Could you put on your earphones again.
24 From the time it takes, I feel guilty about speaking too quickly.
25 There should be someone who stops me as well.
1 Please carefully listen to the next questions that Ms. Friedman
2 will put to you, Mr. Gagic.
3 MS. FRIEDMAN:
4 Q. Mr. Gagic, I'd like to focus now on your investigation and not
5 anything you read afterwards.
6 So your investigation of the Skorpions, did that include reading
7 documentation in a file provided by the ICTY?
8 A. No.
9 Q. So you did not actually investigate this case, looking for a link
10 to the Serbian MUP, did you?
11 A. Correct. I did not look for a link, nor was it part of my
13 JUDGE ORIE: Could we then perhaps, Ms. Friedman, go back to one
14 of the previous answers.
15 Ms. Friedman put to you as one of your answers being:
16 "I am not aware of any links he," and then we are talking about
17 Popovic, "he would have with either the MUP or the DB of the Republic of
18 Serbia, nor was such a link established during investigation."
19 Now, yes, Mr. Bakrac.
20 MR. BAKRAC: May I said that it's the different case.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I know that. But -- I know it's a different
23 But I wanted to know from you, does that mean, if you are
24 referring to an investigation, that you had not read any of the
25 documentary materials which was sent by the ICTY?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Correct. All the information was
2 in the possession of the prosecutor. I received only a videotape from
3 which I was supposed to identify the persons appearing on the film, to
4 locate them, and to organise the operation to arrest them. All the rest
5 was in the hands of the prosecutor.
6 JUDGE ORIE: So whatever links there may have been with Popovic,
7 Mijovic -- you knew apparently that Mijovic was linked to the DB. That's
8 what you said. But apart from that, you had no information available
9 which was sent by the ICTY. You only focussed on who do I have to
10 arrest, and that's it?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Correct. But I know Mijovic
12 personally. He is still alive.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Everything you know comes from the book of
14 Natasa Kandic rather than from documentation sent by the ICTY.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Correct.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Friedman.
17 MS. FRIEDMAN: In that case, I would just note, as I think it
18 will be helpful, that it's on page 13 of the English and 15 of the B/C/S
19 of the Skorpions judgement, which is 1D1321, where they refer to the list
20 of documentation, and two of the documents on the list are P1084 and
22 If the witness hasn't reviewed that documentation in his
23 investigation, I don't think it is relevant to call it up. But for the
24 Chamber it would be relevant.
25 JUDGE ORIE: No. Well, unless you had doubts as far as his
1 answers are concerned. If you want to put it more directly to him.
2 From what I understand from the witness is that he only used any
3 material which he needed to identify -- to identify the persons he had to
5 MS. FRIEDMAN: And that he was not seeking to make a connection
6 with the Serbian MUP.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That is -- I would say that is implicit in
8 what I just said.
9 MS. FRIEDMAN:
10 Q. I have another question about the deployment. You said that you
11 became familiar with the Trnovo operation. Were you aware that one of
12 the units deployed was the Plavi unit?
13 A. I was aware of it but only later.
14 Q. And that the Plavi unit was commanded by Ljubomir Milojevic. And
15 this is the same man who was in Dalj, as the deputy commander. Is that
16 right? Can you confirm that?
17 A. I'm not aware of these facts.
18 Q. Thank you, Mr. Gagic, for answering my questions. I have no
19 further questions at this time.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Ms. Friedman.
21 Mr. Jordash, any further questions before Mr. Bakrac has an
22 opportunity to --
23 MR. JORDASH: Only a handful, if I may.
24 JUDGE ORIE: A handful, yes, yes. It's difficult to look at the
25 clock, what a handful exactly means, but five fingers is five minutes?
1 MR. JORDASH: I think that's --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
3 MR. JORDASH: That's sufficient, I think. Thank you.
4 Further Cross-examination by Mr. Jordash:
5 Q. Yesterday you were asked about Dusan Momcilovic, and towards the
6 end of the day this was, and you were asked the question:
7 "So my question to you" --
8 MR. JORDASH: And this is Your Honours, page 17263.
9 Q. "So my question to you is whether this willingness to join in on
10 the struggle and offer any assistance also reflects the attitude of the
11 police stations in Eastern Slavonia in 1991 and 1992?"
12 And you answered:
13 "Yes, the police force of Eastern Slavonia, as well as the police
14 force in Knin was ready and prepared to provide assistance to all the
15 organs who needed it. Now, what their abilities were is a different
16 matter, but whatever they had at their disposal, they were prepared to
17 place -- to -- to use, to help other organs that needed it in Krajina and
18 Republika Srpska."
19 That rather generalised discussion, I want to try to be a bit --
20 understand what you meant with specifics.
21 Were you talking about police, professional police
22 responsibilities, or were you talking about combat, or -- or what were
23 you talking about?
24 A. Well, the question was put to me after I viewed a video-clip of
25 the speech. And I was asked what this meant. And I said that it meant
1 that the RSK police forces were prepared to provide every possible
2 assistance to all other organs within Krajina and, if possible, to
3 provide assistance in activities from the sphere of the police in Serbia
4 as well.
5 Q. That's right. Because Momcilovic was talking about, when he
6 descended into specifics, he was talking about crime-scene examinations,
7 forensic analysis, things which seemed to be limited to police
8 activities. Is that what you were talking about as well?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Thank you.
11 Thank you, Mr. Witness.
12 MR. JORDASH: And thank you, Your Honours.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
14 Mr. Bakrac.
15 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. With your
16 leave, I will take no more than ten to 15 minutes. I will follow-up on
17 the topic raised by my learned friend, Mr. Jordash.
18 Re-examination by Mr. Bakrac:
19 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Gagic, Ms. Friedman showed you documents
20 yesterday where Momcilovic described his membership as of a certain date.
21 Previously in the course of your examination, you were able to see that
22 Momcilovic had been issued with an official ID of the MUP of the Republic
23 of Serbia, signed by Nikola Curcic in 1992, and you explained why this
25 First tell us: Were official IDs of public security and state
1 security of the Republic of Serbia different at all?
2 A. The IDs that were introduced for public and state security were
3 not different at all, until the point when badges were introduced, and
4 these differed even where it came to within public security branch
6 Q. You say "official badges were introduced."
7 When was this?
8 A. Well, I cannot state with any certainty when it was, but I
9 believe it was in 1994 or 1995. Actually, right after the legislation
10 governing the engagement of the Ministry of the Interior was amended. At
11 that point, the IDs that had been used up to that point were withdrawn,
12 and new IDs and badges were introduced.
13 Q. Is my understanding of what you said correct: You are now
14 speaking of public security, are you not? Because, in fact, in state
15 security, these changes were effected later on.
16 A. Well, as I said, the official IDs of public and state security
17 were completely identical until the format of these IDs was changed.
18 Once the old IDs were withdrawn and new IDs were introduced, these
19 official badges differed even within public security because those who
20 were charged with combat against organised crime had different sort of
21 badges from those who were involved in just crime prevention or even from
22 those that differed -- that were involved in traffic policing.
23 THE INTERPRETER: Can Mr. Bakrac please repeat his question.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac, could you re-start your question.
25 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, I apologise to Their Honours.
1 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter notes that we also missed the
2 last sentence of what the witness said.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but could we -- even part of what the witness
4 said was missing.
5 Witness, I'll take you back to your last answer.
6 I read a portion and then you're invited to add but only add what
7 you then said.
8 You said:
9 "Once the old IDs were withdrawn and new IDs were introduced,
10 these official badges differed even within public security because those
11 who were charged with combat against organised crime had different sort
12 of those" -- no. Yes. "... a different sort of badges from those who
13 were involved in just crime prevention or even from those that ..."
14 And could you please repeat what you then said.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Those who were involved in traffic
16 infractions. And I am not aware at all what the case was in state
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So you say they were exactly the same up till
19 the moment that the old IDs were withdrawn, and the new ones, even within
20 the public security, would not be identical but could differ, depending
21 on whether it was badges for those who were to combat organised crime,
22 those who were involved in crime prevention, or even traffic police.
23 Now, one of the questions which was not answered yet, was the
24 time where the old badges were withdrawn in state security and public
25 security the same, or was it at different times?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm not aware of that. I don't
3 JUDGE ORIE: You don't know.
4 Please proceed, Mr. Bakrac.
5 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
6 Q. Well, let's state what it is that you know for sure. And that is
7 that up until 1994 or 1995, both public and state security had identical
8 IDs; is that right?
9 A. Yes.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The witness told us that he didn't know
11 whether it was different at other times.
12 But let's proceed, Mr. Bakrac.
13 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
14 Q. Mr. Gagic, if my understanding of what you said is correct, you
15 had quite a few friends and acquaintances who were thrown out of the
16 Croatian MUP.
17 Persons who worked in the MUP of the Republika Srpska -- or,
18 rather, the Republic of the Serbian Krajina, starting from the autumn of
19 1991 until August of 1995, when Storm happened, these persons, were they
20 entitled to benefits arising from years of service they had had at the
21 time they worked in the Croatian MUP still when they were working for the
22 RSK MUP?
23 A. Well, I know that there weren't many such cases, but one person
24 who belonged to my unit, after the war ended and once Slavonia was
25 reintegrated into Croatia, stayed on and continued working in the
1 Croatian MUP, and that was in the town of -- if I should name it, it's
2 the town of Ilok.
3 Q. My question had to do with the police. Well, let's take it this
5 Does the -- did the Republic of Croatia recognise the existence
6 of the RSK; if you know?
7 A. No, it did not.
8 Q. The persons who have not returned to the Republic of Croatia yet,
9 are they able to use the benefits arising from the time that they worked
10 for the RSK MUP, would they be able to use it in Croatia now?
11 A. No.
12 Q. You say that you had many acquaintances. Are you familiar of a
13 case where such people would be reporting that -- those years of service
14 in the Republic of Serbia in order to have those years of service with
15 the RSK counted into -- counted toward their benefits in Serbia?
16 A. Yes. A great many people did start working for the MUP of the
17 Republic of Serbia whilst staying for these four years in the territory
18 of the RSK and working there. When they withdrew from the RSK territory,
19 they continued working for the Serbian MUP because that was where --
20 where they had their employment and those years of service were counted
21 toward their current employment. Were credited to them.
22 Q. Do you know of cases where individuals who, later on, post-Storm
23 in 1995, were admitted to the Serbian MUP and after having been admitted,
24 that they sought that their previous years of service within the RSK be
1 A. Well, I can't give you specific cases, but I'm sure that based on
2 the documentation that they would have, that those years of service would
3 be credited to them.
4 Q. Is it fair to conclude that individuals who were admitted to the
5 MUP of the Republic of Serbia at a later date stated in their
6 applications for employment also the years of service during the period
7 when they worked for the RSK MUP?
8 A. Yes.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Friedman.
10 MS. FRIEDMAN: These last few questions have been leading.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, they were.
12 Witness, could you tell us, you say that you're sure that, based
13 on the documentation, that the years of service in the RSK MUP would
15 What makes you sure about that? Is there a legal basis for that,
16 is there -- what is it that you believe this? Because we're less
17 interested in what someone believes but rather in what someone knows.
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Those members of the RSK police
19 who, in the period between 1991 and 1995 started working in the Republic
20 of Serbia whilst remaining in the territory of the RSK, have had their
21 years of service recognised. Those who started working for the MUP of
22 the Republic of Serbia after 1995, if they had valid documentation, they,
23 too, would have had the years of service recognised which they spent
24 working for the RSK MUP. I know that from some of the personal contacts
25 I had.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Tell me what those personal contacts were.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] A group of policemen whom I met
3 later in 2000 or 2001. I can't give you their names, though I might
4 recall one or two, if you give me enough time.
5 JUDGE ORIE: I give you all the time you need for it.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think that one of these cases was
7 a man called Radisevic. He entered into employment -- entered into
8 employment there after 1995.
9 Then a man called Loncarevic, who also began working there after
11 JUDGE ORIE: Was their period of working of the RSK taken into
12 account in -- in respect of -- of benefits or pensions?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes. When I say that they had
14 their years of service recognised, that implies that their pensionable
15 years of service were recognised. These years were regarded as though
16 they had been spent within the service of the Serbian MUP.
17 JUDGE ORIE: So if you earlier told us that you didn't know of
18 any individual cases, that it's not true, because you're now reporting
19 two individual cases where that happened.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know. I'm afraid that
21 there must have a misunderstanding.
22 When I said that I didn't know of individual cases, I meant
23 persons who would have their years of service recognised, whilst they
24 were in the MUP of the Republic of Croatia.
25 JUDGE ORIE: I'll re-read the question, and I'll re-read your
2 Mr. Bakrac, you may proceed.
3 MR. JORDASH: Sorry to interrupt. May I request again an earlier
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. It depends a bit on -- could we just
6 consider if -- if Mr. Bakrac also has only five questions, one handful,
7 then we might -- of course, we'll stop if there's a need to do that. But
8 if we could finish --
9 Ms. Friedman, how much time would you still need?
10 MS. FRIEDMAN: Maybe just one or two more questions.
11 JUDGE ORIE: One or two questions.
12 Another solution would be -- I'm thinking, of course, first of
13 all, about Mr. Stanisic. I'm also thinking about the witness, if we
14 could conclude his testimony before a break. But I leave it, if you say,
15 no, Mr. Stanisic would not -- prefer to take a break already himself and
16 he would want to hear the last questions and answers, then we'll take the
17 break now. Otherwise, I would suggest perhaps that Mr. Stanisic
18 considers whether he wants -- whether he insists to be present for those
19 last few questions and answers.
20 MR. JORDASH: I'll take instructions.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And let Mr. Stanisic feel perfectly free to
22 decide. I mean, his right to attend the proceedings is, of course, fully
24 MR. JORDASH: Well, I know he is feeling extremely ill today and
25 wasn't --
1 JUDGE ORIE: No, that's -- that's not my problem. My problem is
2 whether -- whether he insists on having -- this last five minutes of
3 testimony, to attend that, yes or no. Of course, I have to keep in mind
4 also the interests of the witness. But, of course, the fundamental right
5 of Mr. Stanisic is above that.
6 [Defence counsel confer]
7 MR. JORDASH: If Mr. Stanisic could have a break but the
8 proceedings can continue.
9 JUDGE ORIE: And then, Mr. Bakrac, how much time would you still
11 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Some 15 minutes, Your Honour. Ten
12 to 15 minutes.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then we'll -- then we'll take the break now.
14 We'll take a break, and we'll resume at 25 minutes past 5.00.
15 --- Recess taken at 4.57 p.m.
16 --- On resuming at 5.30 p.m.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac, isn't it true that you earlier indicated
18 that you'd need ten minutes? Because time used should be deduced, not
19 added to the time you earlier indicated. But I'll check that.
20 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I'm sorry, but certain
21 things cropped up that I have to clarify, and that's why I'm asking for
22 additional time.
23 The answers of the witness produced something that I want to
24 clear up.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Try to -- I mean, ten minutes initially, and now,
1 after quite some minutes, another 15 is not what we expect you to do.
2 So please proceed as efficiently as possible. Which does not
3 mean speak very quickly, but efficiently examine the witness.
4 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
5 Could we please call up D456, that is MFI'd, and I need page 43
6 in B/C/S and page 41 in English.
7 THE REGISTRAR: The document is under seal, Your Honours.
8 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes. We need to go into private
10 JUDGE ORIE: We move into private session.
11 [Private session]
11 Pages 17315-17323 redacted. Private session.
15 [Open session]
16 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
18 MR. JORDASH:
19 Q. And then you went on to say that these laws -- you agreed that
20 the laws and regulations were adopted after the Operation Storm.
21 Okay. So that -- those are your answers in relation to that.
22 Do you know why the regulations were adopted so late in the day,
23 1995, some distance after the critical period of the war in Croatia?
24 A. Well, after the first wave of Serb policemen leaving the ranks of
25 the Croatian MUP and joining the RSK MUP, well, they did not go to the
1 Serbian MUP directly but went to other towns within the RSK to find
2 employment in the RSK MUP.
3 Likewise, after Flash and Storm, when they were chased away from
4 the territory of the RSK, yet again they were in a position where they
5 were jobless and applied to the Serbian MUP, which admitted those people.
6 Q. So if I understand you correctly, this was not the result of an
7 agreement that had been reached in 1991 or 1992. It was the result of
8 the events of Operation Flash and an agreement formed at that point
9 between those who had been in the RSK MUP and those who were wanting now
10 to join the Serbian MUP.
11 Am I right?
12 A. Yes, yes. They were bylaws that were adopted after 1995; whereas
13 an interstate -- or inter-governmental treaty was stipulated between
14 Croatia and Serbia only at a much later date. That's to say, 1998 or
16 Q. So, in summary, if I can put it this way, this is a situation
17 which is quite different, for example, from the situation where
18 VJ officers were sent to the Republika Srpska and there was an agreement
19 at the time that they would receive their pensions and benefits. This is
20 a totally different situation to that, isn't it?
21 A. Yes. Their employment was not interrupted. They were JNA
22 officers, and, as such, were dispatched both to the Republika Srpska and
23 the Republic of Serbian Krajina, where they joined the VRS and SVK
24 respectively. This had already been regulated in a federal
25 Law on All People's Defence.
1 Now the police did not have such a possibility to resort to.
2 Q. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Witness.
3 MR. JORDASH: Thank you, Your Honours.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac.
5 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] I didn't want to interrupt my
6 learned friend Mr. Jordash and intervene.
7 At page 58, line 23, the date is wrong.
8 Perhaps I should just ask the witness when it was that the
9 inter-governmental treaty between Croatia and Serbia was signed.
10 JUDGE ORIE: We could ask the witness.
11 Could you tell us when the inter-governmental treaty between
12 Croatia and Serbia was signed.
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It was signed sometime in 2008.
14 And it did not apply to the police force only, but to all the employees.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
16 Ms. Friedman, do you have any further questions.
17 MS. FRIEDMAN: No further questions, Your Honours.
18 JUDGE ORIE: I would have one.
19 Questioned by the Court:
20 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, you told us that Arkan was reporting to
21 Badza, being his subordinate. Was -- were those reports in writing or
23 A. Mostly oral. And mostly these were meetings held at 9.00 every
25 JUDGE ORIE: You said: "Mostly oral."
1 Are you aware of any written reports by Arkan to Badza?
2 A. I didn't see a single written report.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, you said that he reported on the
4 activities for which he was charged by the Staff, the TO Staff.
5 Are you aware of Arkan engaging in any activity outside the
6 assignments that were given to him by the TO Staff?
7 A. Arkan carried out certain activities directly on the orders from
8 the Novi Sad Corps. I don't know what these activities specifically
9 were, but I do know that he had been engaged by the corps command. He
10 had been charged by certain tasks that had not gone through the Staff
12 JUDGE ORIE: Now, would he also engage in activities for which he
13 did not receive any assignment at all? That is, neither from the TO, nor
14 from the Novi Sad Corps.
15 A. That I don't know. Except for obtaining supplies or contacting
16 journalists, there were certain things that he carried out independently.
17 He probably was engaged in certain activities without having received
18 direct orders for them.
19 JUDGE ORIE: And those certain things, apart from obtaining
20 supplies or contacting journalists, could you shed any further light on
21 what those certain activities were?
22 A. Specifically he conducted training in a way that was pretty much
23 autonomous. And I mean the training of his volunteers, once the
24 instructors were trained for that job. He would go out into the field,
25 regardless of whether there was an order from the corps command or the
1 TO Staff command. But I did not mean combat activities. When it came to
2 combat activities, whatever he did was under the command of the TO Staff
3 or the Novi Sad Corps command.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Now this Chamber has heard evidence about persons
5 being killed by Arkan's Men. Would that be an activity he engaged in
6 without any instructions; or can you tell us anything about that?
7 Because you said the way in which he conducted training, obtaining
8 supplies, contacting journalists. Now this is a totally different
9 category. Could you tell us anything - and if you can't, please tell us
10 as well - whether such activities, of which the Chamber received
11 evidence, would be on the basis of an assignment or would be an activity
12 he engaged in all by himself?
13 A. I'm not able to answer the question, other than by drawing an
15 JUDGE ORIE: I would like you not to draw any inferences. I'd
16 rather ask about your knowledge about facts.
17 I have no further questions.
18 No further questions?
19 Then, Mr. Gagic, this concludes your testimony in this court.
20 I'd like to thank you for coming to The Hague and for having answered the
21 questions that were put to you by the parties and by the Bench, and I
22 wish you a safe return home again.
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
24 I have a question for you. Will my military ID that was given to
25 the Registry be given back to me now or at a later date?
1 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
2 JUDGE ORIE: The parties had an opportunity to look into that
3 document. None of the parties have used that opportunity. Is there any
4 need to have it or to have it in evidence? If not, it will be returned
5 immediately to the witness.
6 MS. FRIEDMAN: No need here. We have the scans --
7 JUDGE ORIE: I do not hear from Mr. Jordash.
8 I also do not hear from Mr. Bakrac, but he is in another
10 Mr. Bakrac, any need to further inspect the booklet?
11 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Then it will be returned to the witness and it will
13 not be part of the record.
14 You'll receive it back, Mr. Gagic.
15 You may follow the usher and leave the courtroom.
16 [The witness withdrew]
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash, are you ready to call your next
19 MR. JORDASH: Yes, please.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Then -- oh, I should have instructed the usher to
21 bring the next witness in.
22 Madam Registrar, is there any way to speed up -- that the usher,
23 without delay, brings the witness in?
24 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
25 JUDGE ORIE: I'm afraid that we have to be patient.
1 MS. FRIEDMAN: Your Honours --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
3 MS. FRIEDMAN: -- just a brief procedural matter in relation to
4 the last witness. There was a video I showed at the end of yesterday,
5 65 ter 6228, and I didn't formally tender it. The transcript was covered
6 more than the video so we're just getting a fuller version of the video
7 and would want have it admitted then. But perhaps it could receive an
8 MFI number.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That we already reserve at least a number for
10 the video.
11 Any objection against that video?
12 Ms. Friedman, could you give the further details.
13 Madam Registrar, Ms. Friedman would like to tender a video but it
14 is not uploaded yet in the precise format -- the precise format in
15 which --
16 MS. FRIEDMAN: [Microphone not activated]
17 JUDGE ORIE: So if we reserve a number for that video.
18 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour, it will be MFI'd.
19 [The witness entered court]
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash, no protective measures?
21 MR. JORDASH: No, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Good afternoon, Mr. Selak.
23 Before you give evidence, the Rules of Procedure and Evidence
24 require that you make a solemn declaration, that you will speak the
25 truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
1 The text is now handed out to you. May I invite you to make that
2 solemn declaration.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
4 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
5 WITNESS: OSMAN SELAK
6 [Witness answered through interpreter]
7 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Selak. Please be seated.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash, are you ready to --
10 MR. JORDASH: Your Honour, yes.
11 JUDGE ORIE: I must admit, we're all aware of the rulings of the
12 Chamber what would be the starting point. And finding a large number of
13 pages of exhibits to be used from other cases surprised me a bit, but, of
14 course, I do not know how you intend to use them.
15 MR. JORDASH: Well, I -- I -- I think Your Honours will not need
16 to be concerned.
17 JUDGE ORIE: That's good to hear. That's good to hear.
18 Please proceed.
19 Examination by Mr. Jordash:
20 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Selak. Could you, for the record, please,
21 give your name and date of birth, please.
22 A. Osman Selak; 20 May 1935.
23 Q. First of all, I want to deal with some formalities, in terms of
24 your previous testimony at this court.
25 You - is this correct? - testified in the Milosevic trial on the
1 12th and 13th of June, 2003?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And have you had an opportunity to review that testimony before
4 coming to court today?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. And have you had an opportunity to make any clarifications or
7 amendments that you wish to make to that testimony and have none to make?
8 A. No. I stand by my testimony in the Milosevic case fully, and
9 there is nothing to change there.
10 Q. And what you said during that case was in accordance with the
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. And you'd answer the same if asked the same questions today?
14 A. Yes. I hope that I haven't forgotten, since it is human for
15 persons to forget or for their memories to fade over the years. But I do
16 stand fully by what I stated in the Milosevic case.
17 Q. Thank you, Mr. Selak.
18 MR. JORDASH: May I tendered this previous testimony uploaded as
19 1D03920 and 1D03921 and the associated exhibits which have been notified
20 to the Registry.
21 MS. HARBOUR: No objection, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE ORIE: No objection from the Prosecution. Ms. Harbour --
23 and we talking about the 12th and the 13th of June, 2003, isn't it.
24 MR. JORDASH: Your Honour, yes.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Associated exhibits, also no problems.
1 MS. HARBOUR: None, Your Honour.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Then --
3 MR. JORDASH: Can --
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Still numbers have to be assigned to those
5 because we have the numbers now of the -- that were assigned in the
6 Milosevic case.
7 MR. JORDASH: Could I also indicate something else which needs to
8 be taken in account.
9 The war diary, which is 1D05178, from our 19 -- our 92 bis filing
10 is already exhibited in this trial as P1282. And similarly, 1D05184 is
11 already tendered in this trial as P1307. That exhibit is missing the
12 cover page. We have asked the Prosecution to add the cover page to that
13 exhibit which carries ERN 00184109.
14 MS. HARBOUR: Your Honour, since that's already an admitted
15 exhibit, I'm not sure if the Prosecution should add it or if --
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. What needs to be done is that, if a document
17 is incomplete, to replace the originally admitted document by a completed
18 one, or to add one page, then it, first of all, should be -- that page
19 should be uploaded, and then Madam Registrar will ask permission from
20 this Bench to replace the original exhibit by the new one. And since it
21 is not a complete different one, the only matter we have to keep in mind
22 is that the numbering of the pages in e-court might change, which may
23 cause problems at a later stage when reading the transcript.
24 But, first of all, the cover page should be uploaded and then
25 Madam Registrar will seek the Chamber's decision on replacing the
1 original one. Or adding something to the original one.
2 Apart from that, anything else, Mr. Jordash?
3 MR. JORDASH: No. Not in relation to that issue. Thank you.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Which means that you say two out of ...
5 MR. JORDASH: 31 exhibits have already been admitted.
6 JUDGE ORIE: If I look at the list, I have a list of 29. Yes, 31
7 in its totality.
8 Madam Registrar, could at least 29 numbers be reserved for
9 associated exhibits. And, of course, first of all, we have to assign a
10 number to the -- to the Milosevic transcript which was tendered as well.
11 THE REGISTRAR: Thank you, Your Honour. First Milosevic
12 transcript 1D03920 will receive number D699.
13 And 1D03921 will receive number D700.
14 And associated exhibits will receive numbers within the range
15 from D701 up to, and including, D729, Your Honours.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
17 D699 and D700 are admitted into evidence.
18 For the others, we have to finalise that, but the numbers are
20 MR. JORDASH: Thank you, Your Honour.
21 May we have 1D05439 on the screen. I don't think this goes
22 against Your Honours' orders. I hope not. It's a chart --
23 JUDGE ORIE: Depends what you are doing with it. Let's have a
25 MR. JORDASH:
1 Q. What you're going to see in front of you in a moment, Mr. Selak,
2 is a chart with documents listed on the left side and comments on the
3 right-hand side.
4 This is 1D05439.
5 When you arrived in The Hague, were you provided with this chart
6 and a list of -- sorry, a number of documents and asked to provide your
7 comments in the right-hand side of this chart?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. And were the comments you made -- let me go back a bit.
10 Did you review the comments you made for any amendments or
11 clarifications that you wanted to make?
12 A. The only thing I see in this chart is the title of the document
13 and not the comments I made. For instance, for 3722 or P02524, I can see
14 the title of the document, but not the comment given.
15 Q. Can we -- let's see if we can remedy that.
16 A. Now can I see it now, yes.
17 MR. JORDASH: Perhaps we can go a bit smaller. Can we zoom in.
18 Just -- or zoom out, perhaps.
19 Q. Is this the chart? Are these the comments? And did you have a
20 good opportunity to make any amendments --
21 A. Yes, that is the chart.
22 Q. Did you have an opportunity to review and make any clarifications
23 or amendments to the chart and your comments?
24 A. Yes. I made a comment in relation to every document listed here,
25 and then I certified these comments with my signature at the bottom of
1 this document.
2 Q. And were your comments in accordance with the truth?
3 A. Based on the documents I read and reviewed, I tried to give
4 accurate answers. What I can say is that I stand by the comments that I
5 wrote in this chart. The comments were brief, also, because there was
6 not much space in the chart. And if the comment is not sufficient, I am
7 prepared to clarify or add to these comments for the Trial Chamber or ...
8 Q. Thank you, Mr. Selak. And I think you probably answered my next
9 question which was, if asked or shown the documents, would you give the
10 same comments, in substance, as you have in the chart?
11 A. I see no reason why I should change my view in respect of each of
12 these documents. So there's nothing for me to modify.
13 Q. Thank you.
14 MR. JORDASH: May I tender the chart, please, and the underlying
16 MS. HARBOUR: No objection.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Now the underlying documents, they're all different
18 from the ones we have on the associated exhibits from [Overlapping
19 speakers] ...
20 MR. JORDASH: Yes, there's ten new exhibits which --
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
22 MR. JORDASH: -- the numbers have been provided to the Registry.
23 I can read them out if Your Honours wish.
24 JUDGE ORIE: I see -- let me just check. Some of them have been
25 admitted already, isn't it? I see, for example, P2524.
1 MR. JORDASH: I beg your pardon. Sorry, yes. Some -- yes, they
2 have. As indicated in --
3 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. What we'll do, we'll first have a number
4 assigned to the chart.
5 Madam Registrar, the number would be.
6 THE REGISTRAR: Chart number 1D5439 will receive number D730,
7 Your Honours.
8 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence.
9 Now how many numbers do we need to reserve for the exhibits or
10 the documents referred to?
11 MR. JORDASH: Ten.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Ten.
13 Madam Registrar, may I then take it that the numbers D731 up to
14 D740 would be reserved.
15 THE REGISTRAR: Yes. Thank you, Your Honour.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Those numbers are reserved, and we'll complete
17 the -- the chart at a later stage.
18 Please proceed.
19 MR. JORDASH: Your Honour, I have a public summary to read.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please read the summary.
21 Have you explained to Mr. Selak what the purpose of it is?
22 MR. JORDASH: Actually, I don't think I did, so perhaps I
23 should --
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then I'll --
25 Mr. Selak, since part of the evidence you are giving is the
1 transcript you've reviewed from the Milosevic case, Mr. Jordash will
2 summarise what is found in that transcript so that those who are
3 following these proceedings know what your evidence is about.
4 Please proceed, Mr. Jordash.
5 MR. JORDASH: Thank you.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's clear.
7 MR. JORDASH: The witness is a Bosnian Muslim and served in the
8 JNA. In 1986 he was promoted to the rank of colonel, the commander of
9 the logistics base. In March 1992, the witness became the head of the
10 Department for the Co-operation with the Peacekeeping Operation of the
11 United Nations in the Bosnian Krajina. In his position as commander of
12 the logistics base in Banja Luka, the witness was responsible for the
13 logistical supply of the Banja Luka Corps, the 1st Corps, the 2nd Corps,
14 and the area of the Banja Luka base.
15 The witness discusses the order issued by the commander of the
16 Republican Staff of the TO of Bosnia and Herzegovina, according to which
17 the District Staffs of the TO had to collect all weaponry and ammunition
18 from social and public enterprises and place the weaponry in the JNA
19 warehouses. Being in charge of the logistics, the witness participated
20 in the collection of weaponry from the TO units in his zone of
21 responsibility. The witness --
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash, part of the problem is caused by the
24 fact that the French booth has no written version of your summary, which
25 makes it more difficult for them to translate.
1 So I would suggest that you proceed but even at a slower pace as
2 you did before.
3 MR. JORDASH: Certainly. And apologies to the booth.
4 The witness discusses the occasion when, acting under the
5 instructions of General Uzelac, he had to issue weapons to TO units in
6 Sipovo, Mrkonjic Grad, and the 5th Kozara Brigade on Mount Mrakovica near
8 The witness also discusses the distribution of weapons by the JNA
9 and the Serbian Democratic Party. The quantity distributed by the JNA
10 came from the warehouses of various logistics bases and from the surplus
11 of weaponry obtained from the JNA in Slovenia [Realtime transcript read
12 in error "Slavonia"] and Croatia. The Serbian Democratic Party received
13 weapons from the transports coming from Slovenia and Croatia.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm sorry. Not Slavonia. Slavonia
15 is a separate province in the Republic of Croatia. It is Slovenia.
16 MR. JORDASH: Sorry.
17 JUDGE ORIE: I think, Mr. Jordash, you -- did you read Slovenia
19 MR. JORDASH: Well, I intended to read Slovenia but --
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I think that is what I heard but it may have
21 been a human error somewhere. It is about Slovenia and -- Slavonia and
23 Please proceed.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Slovenia and Croatia.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Now I am adding to the confusion. Apologies for
1 that. It's clear now.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No problem.
3 MR. JORDASH: The witness explained prior to the 18th of May in
4 1992, the logistics chain consisted of a logistics administration, acting
5 on behalf of the JNA, and the logistics base in Banja Luka. He was a
6 commander of that base. After the JNA was officially withdrawn from
7 Bosnia and Herzegovina and the VRS was formed, the witness was
8 responsible for the supplies for the territory of the VRS and the Army of
9 the Republika Srpska Krajina, part of the territory of Croatia.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
11 MR. JORDASH: The witness discusses the relationship between the
12 VJ General Staff and the VRS Command. He testified that the
13 General Staff of the VJ was responsible for the VRS regarding many
14 questions of command and control, as well as logistics support.
15 As for the relationship between the 14th Rear Service Base, the
16 renamed base that the witness was commander of, and the technical
17 administration base of the VJ and Commander Colonel Milisav Brkic, the
18 witness stated that there was daily personal contacts between the offices
19 of the technical service and the logistics base in Banja Luka and the
20 technical administration base in Belgrade.
21 The witness communicated with him regularly by phone.
22 Colonel Brkic would write instructions to provide the required material.
23 The witness also discussed convoys after the withdrawal of the
24 JNA. His logistics base would regularly send convoys of trucks for fuel
25 to Serbia and Belgrade -- to Belgrade in Serbia, where the technical
1 administration would indicate the location and the material that had to
2 be collected and taken to the Banja Luka base.
3 The witness also discussed the military supplies of diesel oil
4 and other motor oil products and confirmed that they were authorised by
5 the FRY government before being given to the Republika Srpska and
6 disguised as humanitarian aid.
7 If can I now move to the next stage.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Please do so.
9 MR. JORDASH:
10 Q. Mr. Selak, your evidence is now before the Court. The previous
11 transcripts from the Milosevic case and also the associated exhibits, so
12 we don't need to repeat what's in them.
13 First of all, before we move to the substance of your testimony,
14 I know that you wanted, with the learned Judges' leave, to say something
15 about your arrival in court today and your co-operation.
16 MR. JORDASH: With Your Honours' leave, could Mr. Selak make that
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Selak may make a short comment. Most
19 important is that Mr. Selak is with us today and that he will give his
20 testimony and that's where the focus should be.
21 Mr. Selak, and whether there were any misunderstandings, yes or
22 no, in arriving here, seems not to be very important. At least that's
23 not something this Court will have to decide or -- we are anxious to hear
24 your testimony rather than to hear an explanation on your co-operation,
25 yes or no.
1 But if you want to say a few words about it, but then, really,
2 very brief.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
4 My first contact related to this case was from Belgrade, from a
5 lady lawyer, who called me up and asked me if I would accept to testify
6 in this case.
7 At that moment, I was in Croatia. It was the month of November.
8 I asked her to call me back, and she called me several times on the
9 phone. I even became suspicious because it was just by telephone.
10 Nobody ever contacted me except by telephone. And I explained to the
11 lady that I had given statements in the Milosevic case, that I stand by
12 them, they may be used, they are signed statements, but she insisted.
13 And I still didn't believe that I was really being invited by the Court.
14 And I said if the Court really summons me, I will come. And I apologise,
15 the police came to see me to ask me to sign a protocol whereby I accept,
16 but that document said that if I don't accept, I would be subject to a
17 prison sentence of seven years.
18 This is the first time I experienced something like that. I
19 would like that summons to be withdrawn. I came normally, without any
20 problem, and I want to tell the truth.
21 JUDGE ORIE: I'm going to stop you there, Mr. Selak.
22 Apparently you having been invited only by telephone, you very
23 much insisted on having a written invitation or summons to receive. Now
24 whatever form that took, finally you have been subpoenaed and that's a
25 formality, that's a court order. And, of course, you have to obey to
1 such a court order. If you do not -- and, of course, we would not expect
2 people not to obey such a court order. And you're here, so you obeyed
3 it, so the whole penalty seems to be irrelevant at this moment. If it
4 may have surprised you, these are legal formalities. As I said before,
5 you're there, you did obey the court order, and we're anxious to hear
6 your evidence.
7 Please proceed, Mr. Jordash.
8 MR. JORDASH: Thank you. May which have on the screen 65
9 ter 1D05405. This is an exhibit what -- which was tendered in the Tadic
10 case and, strictly speaking, is outside of Your Honours' order but I hope
11 that it is going to be useful to situate Mr. Selak's evidence. It's a
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If -- if -- if it's a map it may help. You
14 know what the reasons were why the Chamber did not want to be flooded by
15 huge numbers of documents which likely would -- the one might cover the
16 subject matter of the other as well. And therefore we said take one
17 starting point and whatever else is needed, that should be elicited
18 viva voce.
19 Let's have a look at the document, the map.
20 MR. JORDASH: Perhaps I can lead, and if my learned friend
21 objects at any point, then obviously I will stop. But I don't think
22 there will be any dispute about the -- the locality of the witness's
23 sphere of responsibility, I hope.
24 MS. HARBOUR: No problem with that approach, Your Honour.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Then please proceed, Mr. Jordash.
1 MR. JORDASH: Thank you, Your Honour.
2 Q. This map then shows the area where your logistics base operated
3 prior to 18th of May, 1992, with the red line showing where you were
4 supplying; correct?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Now, just to fill in some details, if we can.
7 Am I correct that there was an ammunition warehouse -- perhaps we
8 can mark this on the map as we go along.
9 MR. JORDASH: If the witness could be given --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could the usher please assist the witness.
11 MR. JORDASH:
12 Q. I want to mark, Mr. Selak -- or I want you to mark where the
13 various warehouses were of the supplies which your base was responsible
14 for distributing.
15 Could you mark the ammunition warehouses, please, within your
16 zone of responsibility.
17 A. The ammunition depot in Donji Vakuf, the munitions depot in
18 Mrkonjic Grad, and another ammunition depot in Banja Luka.
19 Q. What about fuel depots? Were any of those within your sphere --
20 A. The fuel depot in Jajce and Banja Luka.
21 Q. Was there any place where reserve supplies were kept?
22 A. Reserves of what? I'm not clear about the question. You mean
23 reserves of fuel?
24 Q. General reserve supplies.
25 A. Fuel reserves, as I said, were in Jajce and Banja Luka, as I
1 said. Ammunition, Donji Vakuf, Mrkonjic Grad and Banja Luka. And the
2 depot of spare parts for combat vehicles, tanks and such was in
3 Banja Luka.
4 Q. Was there anything in -- was there anything in Krcmarica?
5 A. Well, that's the ammunition depot, municipality of Banja Luka. A
6 place called Krcmarica, about 3 kilometres outside of Banja Luka, on the
7 outskirts. That's why I said Banja Luka.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Could I ask you to repeat your question whether
9 there was anything in and then what locality did you refer to.
10 MR. JORDASH: Krcmarica.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
12 MR. JORDASH:
13 Q. Was there any other supplies at Krcmarica other than ammunition?
14 A. There was also infantry weapons at Krcmarica. Weapons brought
15 from Slovenia and partly from Croatia during the withdrawal of the army.
16 But there was also another depot in the barracks called Trapisti, also in
17 Banja Luka. It's all in Banja Luka. Krcmarica, Trapisti and another one
18 in Banja Luka. But the ammunition was only in Krcmarica.
19 Q. And what about Doboj? Did you have anything to do with Doboj?
20 A. Doboj was not in the area of the logistical base Banja Luka, but
21 when the war began, there was an ammunition depot near Doboj, and I used
22 the supplies from that depot to resupply the units that were near Doboj
23 and also near Brcko and Bijeljina.
24 But before the war, Doboj was not within the area of the
25 logistical base of Banja Luka.
1 Q. And what about Sarajevo, which we cannot see on the map but it's
2 to the south-east. Did you have anything to do with the -- Sarajevo?
3 A. The command of the 2nd Army District of the Yugoslav People's
4 Army was based in Sarajevo and the logistical base was subordinated to
5 the command of the 2nd Military District in Sarajevo. Also in Sarajevo,
6 was a logistical base bearing the number 744, and it covered the
7 territory bordering on Herzegovina and Eastern Bosnia, Gorazde, Visegrad,
8 and Doboj.
9 In Tuzla, to the right of Banja Luka, closer to the border with
10 Serbia, there was another logistical base that covered that area. Brcko,
11 Modrica, Bosanski Brod, et cetera.
12 Q. And that base was somebody else's responsibility; is that right?
13 That didn't come under your sphere of responsibility?
14 A. No, no. My area of responsibility was as shown here on the map.
15 During the war, it was part of Croatia, and what is marked by the red
17 Q. Thank you.
18 MR. JORDASH: May we tender this as an exhibit, please.
19 MS. HARBOUR: No objection, Your Honour.
20 JUDGE ORIE: The map now marked by the witness receives number?
21 THE REGISTRAR: Number D741, Your Honours.
22 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence.
23 MR. JORDASH: May we have on the screen, please, 1D05409, which
24 is a map which deals with the situation after the 18th of May, 1992.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
1 MR. JORDASH:
2 Q. Similarly, does the red line indicate your sphere of
3 responsibility, Mr. Selak?
4 A. Yes, yes.
5 Q. Can you summarise very briefly what was the difference between
6 the two time-periods?
7 A. On 18 May 1992, the Army of Republika Srpska was officially
8 proclaimed. The logistical base in Banja Luka became part of the
9 Army of Republika Srpska, while the logistical base that used to be in
10 Bihac before the war was liquidated when the army withdrew. It ceased to
12 The units that happened to be within the area of responsibility
13 of the Banja Luka logistical base continued to use the logistical
14 supplies from my base. That was now the 1st Krajina Corps, the
15 2nd Krajina Corps, closer to Drvar and Bihac, those two corps. And there
16 was an operations group that was established but they gravitated towards
17 Brcko. The operations group was not yet established when the VRS was
18 officially proclaimed.
19 Q. Did you have anything to do with Brcko post-18th of May, 1992?
20 A. Yes. The line of replenishment, the route of replenishment from
21 Banja Luka towards Belgrade and vice versa went through Brcko and
22 Bijeljina. That's the only route that was operative and was used to
23 resupply all the units and even businesses in the area of Bosnian
24 Krajina. Banja Luka, Brcko, Bijeljina, Serbia, was the official -- the
25 only route used.
1 Q. And how often, do you think, in 1992 were there convoys along
2 that route from Banja Luka to Belgrade and back again, picking up
3 supplies? Are you able to gauge that on a weekly or monthly basis?
4 A. That corridor, as we called it, Banja Luka-Brcko-Belgrade was
5 used on a daily basis. Military transports from the logistical base of
6 Banja Luka that went to Serbia to be loaded with ammunition, weapons,
7 fuel, spare parts, medical equipment, machines and medical supplies were
8 numerous. They went in motorcades. And when Banja Luka experienced food
9 shortages, I would allow military motorcades to include dozens of trucks
10 to be filled in Serbia. Trucks from various companies. So it was used
11 also for the transport of the wounded in ambulances, and some were
12 transported by helicopter in emergency cases. So that this communication
13 was both by air and by road every day. Military columns were secured by
14 military police and even by helicopters to protect them from all sorts of
15 sabotage and attacks.
16 Q. You indicated that when there was food shortages, the motorcades
17 would include dozens of trucks to be filled in Serbia.
18 In relation to logistics of a more military nature, how big were
20 A. 30 to 35 motor vehicles, beginning with fuel tanks, to regular
21 trucks, trailer trucks, and such.
22 When the VRS came into being, General Djordje Djukic, assistant
23 commander for logistics in the Main of the VRS Staff, held a meeting with
24 us in Banja Luka and he told us that the links between the
25 Republika Srpska and Serbia will be daily. The communication would be
1 daily. And he also said that Serbia takes upon itself to pay salaries
2 for officers who were on the payroll of the JNA on the 18th of May and
3 were currently in Republika Srpska, and that system continued to be in
4 place throughout the war.
5 JUDGE ORIE: When you said 30 to 35 motor vehicles, you meant to
6 say 30 to 35 a day?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Not every day. Large columns
8 travelled once or twice per month.
9 JUDGE ORIE: And if you're talking about these columns, you're
10 talking about the 30 to 35 motor vehicles?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
13 MR. JORDASH: And --
14 JUDGE ORIE: Another three minutes.
15 MR. JORDASH:
16 Q. Let me try to round up this particular subject.
17 How -- how would it work? Who -- who made the requests to
18 Belgrade? And were the requests to Belgrade ever refused?
19 A. The units of both of the 1st and 2nd Krajina Corps, logistical
20 units, made requests to my services in Banja Luka for ammunition, for
21 medical supplies, for weapons, et cetera, by type of supply. We
22 integrated those requests, and then we would get on the phone with
23 Belgrade, with the General Staff of the Serbian army, and we would agree
24 on where, what could be picked up in Belgrade, Novi Sad or Nis, where the
25 Yugoslav People's Army had depots. And these depots continued to
2 Then we would write up the papers. Belgrade would give its
3 approval, and when the trucks travelled to Serbia, they would go to their
4 various destinations, depending on what they had to collect, and then the
5 convoy would be made up again, and they would return together from Serbia
6 to Banja Luka.
7 From my depot, the logistical depot in Banja Luka, all these
8 units would then take whatever supplies they needed, and surpluses would
9 be kept in the depots of the logistical base of Banja Luka for further
10 resupplies to units.
11 Q. And that --
12 MR. JORDASH: I can leave it there, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Perhaps -- because I'd like to have a brief
14 look at scheduling as well.
15 Mr. Selak, we started only late today.
16 Mr. Jordash, how much time would you still need?
17 Mr. Jordash.
18 MR. JORDASH: Oh, I beg your pardon.
19 JUDGE ORIE: How much time would you still need?
20 MR. JORDASH: Approximately one and a half hours, I think.
21 JUDGE ORIE: One and a half hours.
22 Mr. Bakrac.
23 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, for the moment,
24 nothing. And if necessary, I'd take perhaps ten minutes.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Harbour.
1 MS. HARBOUR: It's difficult to say right now. We'd say
2 three hours. It could be that we could cut it shorter.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Therefore, Mr. Selak, it is likely that we would not
4 finish your testimony tomorrow. Now, we usually are sitting for
5 three days for reasons I will not further explain to you, which would
6 mean that we most likely would then resume only next week, Monday.
7 Would that be a problem for you?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It won't be a problem, Your Honour.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Then we'll -- if -- if it would be the case,
10 Mr. Jordash, that with a very limited number of hours we could conclude
11 the testimony of the witness, we would certainly consider that.
12 Although, looking at several agendas, they're rather filled.
13 We first have to wait and see how matters develop tomorrow.
14 But please keep that in the back of your mind, either a limited
15 number of hours. Because we have not been scheduled for Thursday because
16 we moved to the Monday. But if by just sitting for one or two hours on
17 Thursday, we would conclude the testimony, I would ask -- first of all,
18 invite you to discuss this with Mr. Stanisic, to what extent that would
19 cause a major problem to him, and I would like the parties to consider
21 Mr. Selak, we'll adjourn for the day. I hereby instruct you that
22 you should not speak or communicate in any other way with whomever about
23 your testimony, whether that's testimony given already, or still to be
24 given. And we'd like to see you back tomorrow morning, Wednesday, the
25 15th of February, at 9.00 in this same courtroom, II.
1 And we adjourn until then.
2 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.01 p.m.,
3 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 15th day of
4 February, 2012, at 9.00 a.m.